<p>D is junior using a rather unusual approach to the SAT to maximize her superscore and minimize her prep time. She's really busy and can't afford too much time to study. </p>
<p>She took the PSAT and her CR was the worst, so she studied exclusively for the CR and took the Jan SAT, where her CR greatly improved to a place she's happy with, but math suffered a little and writing was pretty bad because of a low essay score. She's a very strong math student and she thinks that her mistakes are all stupid mistakes. </p>
<p>She's signed up for the March and is working exclusively on the writing. There is only a few weeks, so she might not get to prepare much for math. Suppose that she does well on the writing in March, but doesn't bring the math to where she's capable of. </p>
<p>She will then work exclusively on hard math problems and take the SAT one more time for a total of 3 times. </p>
<p>Don't most schools superscore the SAT? Is there really any downside to this approach other than wasting an extra Saturday. This approach seems to reduce the pressure on her because in her mind she's done with CR and she can focus on a smaller set of things. </p>
<p>She already has a really high hard science SAT II score and is taking the Math Level II in June. Most of the schools she's interested in only look at the ACT or the SAT I+II, so given the good CR score, I think it makes sense for her to skip the ACT altogether. The school that she's most interested does look at the writing. Few schools look at ACT+SAT II Writing, though some do. </p>
<p>Yes many schools superscore. BUT most schools will also see ALL of her scores. An improvement in her scores would be nice…but if they see a very significant decrease in a section score, you would think they might wonder why. In other words…tell her NOT to goof off on the other sections!!</p>
<p>Using score choice would prevent most schools from seeing all of the scores. Colleges that require all scores to be sent will notice the number of attempts and any grade disparity.</p>
<p>I think it is a great strategy if you can afford it and if student will go 3 times. I think it means you send only your highest scores from each section. I considered having my son retake the CR section since his math and writing were well in range for the school he wanted. I knew he didn’t want to so I was going to tell him he didn’t have to work on the other sections. I was pretty sure they’d only get the scores he chose. Figured if he got 200 on the other sections they’d know he skipped them! Obviously the first 2 times students should TRY on all sections even if they only studied for 1.</p>
<p>My kid did not prepare at all except for what they did in school. His math class did a 6 week prep when senior year started which raised his score 80-100 points. I had originally been annoyed that they wouldn’t let him take a higher math level, but it worked out because the higher level probably did not do the SAT review. Actually they would have let him IN the higher class, but even if he struggled he would have had to STAY in it. I couldn’t let him take that risk. I get so mad when administration is so inflexible and so concerned with following “policy” rather than the needs of individual students.</p>
<p>Depends on how lopsided the scores are. An adcom at a Tufts information session a couple of years back talked about how they superscore the SAT. He then said there are exceptions, like when one applicant had something like a 740/500 M/CR on one test date, and the converse on another. Those aren’t the exact numbers, just an example of the type of difference in scores. The adcom said that the student was using as much time as possible on just the math (or CR) sections on one test date, giving questions on the “unfavored” side just the briefest attention. Now, maybe that’s what happened, or maybe the student was skipping a section, or maybe they honestly had a bad day on the other side. It wasn’t looked on very kindly–the student wasn’t admitted AND they’re a cautionary anecdote for prospies.</p>
<p>Mom2009, you are right. I didn’t realize score choice still requires SAT I tests to be reported in their entirety or not. No mixing and matching from different days.</p>
<p>Somebody is not being completely candid here. Do you think a school like Tufts would really lie?</p>
<p>I looked at the schools D2 is interested in. Most are score choice with a policy like Tufts, which is basically, “score choice is redundant because we do it for you anyway”. I like the approach they say they use. Some look at all of the scores and some are “score choice is ok but we look at everything you send us”. A few are highest single sitting, but I think her current score is good enough for those anyway. </p>
<p>My sense is that standardized test scores and recalculated GPAs go into a computer and come up with a “Academic Index”. Then they bin students by Academic Index and admit a certain probability from each bin based on the rest of the application. Getting into a higher bin improves your chances. </p>
<p>D wants to do this so that she doesn’t have to waste too much time preparing for a standardized test that she hates. She’d like to be done in March, but schoolwork is preventing her from spending a lot of time on it. I doubt her scores on the sections she’s not focusing on will drop significantly.</p>
<p>Three times is not going to hurt anyone. I did hear with my very own ears a Vassar ad com say that if you took it four or five times they might start wondering why you didn’t have better things to do on a Saturday morning. But the implication was that if nothing else in your folder looked like you were a grade grubbing grind they wouldn’t have a problem even with more than three. </p>
<p>Hopefully as your daughter masters each section and just with the practice of having done the SAT her scores in previous sections she’s mastered won’t go down much if at all. My kids never managed to get their weakest sections up more than 20 points, but they didn’t study very hard IMO.</p>
<p>I think the Tufts example of a 250 point spread is extreme. Most people who retake the SATs will not have that kind of discrepancy, and such a spread would probably be a red flag regardless of how many times someone retakes the exam.</p>
<p>I am puzzled by the concerns about retaking the exam. My son took it three times. He never studied the first two times and his CR score did not reflect his abilities, and was a lot lower than his PSAT CR score. We got a lot of advice both ways. A lot of people said it would “look bad” if he took the SATs a third time. But how can showing a desire to improve and showing motivation to succeed look so bad? He is not a kid who pads his resume in other ways so retaking it was not about this. It was about giving an accurate representation of his abilities.</p>
<p>My son took the SATs the third time, after actually studying and putting some effort into preparation. His CR score went from 690 to 790. This put him in the running to apply to schools he would not have been able to consider otherwise. We are SO glad we did not listen to all of the people who try to strategize about what looks best to admissions.</p>
<p>You know your child best and what you think will work. You know whether retaking the exam will improve her scores or not. Don’t worry about strategy and how retaking it looks. If you think her scores will really improve, you may regret it if you prevent her from retaking it because someone tells you it might look bad if she did.</p>
<p>I think you’re on the right track with the SAT issue–the only comment I’d add is, make sure your HS doesn’t record test scores on the transcript! </p>
<p>Here are a few comments re: subject test strategies.</p>
<p>Be sure to look at each school website to learn what they want–most want 2 and don’t care what subject, but some dictate subjects based on choice of major, or want one from humanities/language + one from math/science, some want Math II over Math I and some have rules about foreign language subject tests. While you are there, double-check their score report rules, and if the topic isn’t addressed as to subject test scores, then follow the score choice, send all, etc. rule they follow for SAT scores. </p>
<p>If it’s manageable, she should finish all testing this year so that task doesn’t carry over to senior fall. Subject tests will be offered in May and June, then not again until Sept, so testing just as you finish the junior year class vs. in the fall obviously makes a huge difference in test prep. Indeed, students often sign up for the same AP test and subject test to kill two birds. Subject tests are one hour each. Students often take two per sitting, a few take three. As a general rule (check the College Board site for details if this comes up), once you’re registered, you can change your subject test topic as late as test day, e.g., from Math II to Lit, except for foreign lang with listening (because of the equipment required). </p>
<p>If she defers completion of subject tests to the fall, be sure she knows the last month she can test and still meet any early application deadline. The school websites will include that information in the early application rules section.</p>
<p>ClassicRockerDad, I don’t think the Tufts website directly contradicts what the adcom says. (full disclosure–D1 is a freshman there, so of course I like the admissions folks :)) This was such an extreme example that the student’s record really set warning bells buzzing. I suspect that adcoms at many superscoring schools would have the same kind of reaction.</p>
<p>One of the Tufts adcoms reads and responds on the forum here on CC–it might be worth posting there to say that your D had some odd swings in her subscores of, say, 700/600 M/CR one time, and 600/700 M/CR the other time (or whatever is kind of representative of your D’s scores–the delta is probably more important than the actual scores), and would this look odd on her application, because you heard a story on CC where some lunatic said that Tufts looks suspiciously on wide swings like this. If your D isn’t interested in Tufts at all, it’s still useful proxy data for you and your D.</p>
<p>heard a similar story from an adcom at a small College in New Hampshire. Student with large swings between M & CR on different days was rejected bcos it was ‘obvious to them that the applicant was gaming the system, perhaps resting the brain during the ‘off sections’…’; their conclusion was that this was akin to gaining an unfair advantage. </p>
<p>Bult giving best efforts in every section and taking three times should not be an issue. Quite frankly, she did the smart thing by prepping hard for CR first. Once you learn how not to fall asleep in those mind-numbing passages, she should do fine in the second round. And the M is the easier for which to prep. My guess is that she’ll be done after two takes.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Only at the Ivies, for athletes. Think about it…how many applications does Tufts receive every year? How many apps show up the first week of January? How many senior transcripts don’t show up until early-mid February? </p>
<p>IMO, it is physically impossible for most colleges to recalc gpa’s. It just doesn’t happen. Instead, adcoms eyeball the applicant against the school profile if the HS does not rank. It is not hard for a highly selective school like Tufts to recognize what the HS gpa must be to be in the top decile.</p>
<p>This could perhaps be a typo, but it would be hard for any school to look at the SATII Writing score because it was last offered in 2005. </p>
<p>Regarding focusing on specific sections for the preparation and testing, I am not sure I understand the dilemma. A student who has earned a great score in an indidividual section should be able to approach the test with serenity. Couple with the previous experience, there are no reasons to think that the score would necesarily tumble. Musing away during the section or punting it on purpose is simply silly. You may as well keep your mind sharp. Also, not working hard on a specific section might alert a proctor of an intent to cheat. All in all, attack the section as a game and the result might be even better. </p>
<p>IMHO, discussions about score choice and the maximum number of administrations have always been speculative. The only study on the issue has shown that schools do not handicap multiple sittings; only the highest score matter. Of course, one could find some anecdotes about adcoms pretending that their school might analyze the scores with great attention. But then, you have to realize that the traveling adcoms and the ones who are giving tours are known to contradict their own admission policies because of a lack of knowledge and experience. Most of the adcoms are junior officers who like to mix opinions with facts and tell what the audience wants to hear. </p>
<p>Is there a bottom line? Yes! Do not agonize over this and overthink. Remember, overthinking is the nemesis of all SAT takers. /smile </p>
<p>As long as one thinks he can improve the score with an additional trial, there are no reasons to hesitate. Forget the potential dangers of having to disclose all the scores. There is a 99 percent chance that the adcom would never see anything else than the highest score in the reading folder. And there is ZERO chance that any score would ever be “increased” because it was a single test.</p>
<p>PS When it comes to recalculating GPA and analyzing multiple SAT sessions, just think how long it would take a school to get this done by multiplying 10/15 minutes by the total number of applications. Most Ivy League schools would need about 7,000 hours. 20 people working 35 hours for 10 weeks? Yeah, that will happen!</p>
<p>If a school really wants to look at just the first sitting of the SAT they could put that in their requirements and do that. If they didn’t want to super score they could do that too. (And some schools do.) If a school says they super score SATs and they don’t care if it’s three different seatings I’d take them at their word. If they actually did care they could easily change their requirements.</p>
Not to mention that GCs probably address the issue, especially in schools that don’t rank.</p>
<p>I agree that despite the fact that many posters here on CC think it’s significant, I don’t think “one and done” makes any impression at all on admissions committees.</p>
<p>Well, to hit 2400 in your first sitting is more impressive to me than hitting 2400 over three sittings, or even in your third sitting. But, if it were more impressive to the admissions committees they could change their requirements so they would only get the first sitting. They don’t. So I’m guessing it’s not the kind of impressive they make admissions decisions on.</p>
said that Tufts looks suspiciously on wide swings like this. If your D isn’t interested in Tufts at all, it’s still useful proxy data for you and your D.</p>